If you didn't ostracize half of the population from the IT field, we could be much more technologically advanced today

If you didn't ostracize half of the population from the IT field, we could be much more technologically advanced today.

Other urls found in this thread:

kff.org/other/state-indicator/physicians-by-gender/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel={"colId":"Location","sort":"asc"}
math.kth.se/matstat/gru/godis/sex.pdf
citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.468.8157&rep=rep1&type=pdf
youtube.com/watch?v=tiJVJ5QRRUE
youtube.com/watch?v=p5LRdW8xw70
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Nobody ostracized women from tech, they would just rather play with dolls and circle jerking about their makeup growing up while guys got into tech.

/thread

...

That is a fact, it's saying anything bad about women, but idiots like you think that men and women think the same way and have the same interests, when it's not true.

*not saying

This. Woman have for the most part been the ones waiting to be rescued by a prince. They have almost never taken an initiative to be someone in their lives. As long as they get cock and money almost every day then they're happy.

It's nothing to be ashamed of really, that was what nature intended all along. If it wasn't like this then woman would have abandoned men and built their own societies and the human population would have died eons ago.

Why would a woman want to get into a field with guys like you joking about how stupid they are because they wear makeup. So much irony in your post.

Kek if what is stopping a woman from learning about technology is me making a joke on Sup Forums, that shows they have no interest in the field. Guys make jokes about each other and roast each other all the time, it's how they interact, when a women injects herself in a social situation like that and gets joked about she feels like shes being targeted even though that's how men interact with their friends.

Women are a reddit meme anyways.

You make a lot of wrong assumptions. There have been countless women in tech for over 60 years; they weren't held back or discriminated against. Funny how it's only in the last 15 years since victim-culture sprung to life there has been a "problem" to offer a solution to.

>how stupid they are because they wear makeup
He didn't say it was stupid to wear makeup, learn to read stupid fag.

If you didn't ostracize half of the population from the Fire Fighting field, we could have much fewer fatalities caused by fires.

/threaderino

...

If you didn't ostracize half of the population from the Aircraft pilots and flight engineers field, we could have much more plane crashes each year.

Modern bitches need to stop being bitches.

what did he mean by this?

Women complain that they are ostracized from all the easy do-nothing fields, but they don't speak up about being almost no percentage of manual labor and other dangerous fields.

>gaming surveillance officers
That's it, I'm done.

You know that means security for casinos and shit right? Dumb nigger.

Women are under represented in the military too. Why I've never seen you complain about the lack of women on the front lines to defend their country? Must be that evil patriarchy too, right?

What gaming casino would you recommend user?

>elementary and middle school teachers

honestly the rest I don't care about but I really do think there should be more men in this position.

some of the best and most memorable teachers I had were male, even though there were only 1/4 of the staff at my schools.

no, the fewer fatalitiies part

Are you honestly this fucking stupid? Gaming means gambling, it has meant gambling way before you kids have played your shitty meme of legends, for fucks sake at least pretend you aren't underage.

nothing is keeping women out apart from themselves

I don't know what you're asking me, but I don't think most women are fit to serve in the military though, they'll also distract the vast majority who are male.

the bible forbids women from teaching

really makes you think

If you force women into tech then men will just go into something else.

It already happened. Programming was not for men, it was a girl's job. Women took over the field of medicine, and displaced the men into engineering, physics, astronomy, computer science.

>Programming was not for men
How do you figure pajeet?

If you quit after being ostracized, you weren't really into it in the first place.

I recall growing up amd hearing tech was the way to go so I jumped on it.

Meanwhile every female I knew said computers were for nerds and that nursing was a far easier field and they could even marry a doctor.

Men aren't the problem here. Women are their own worst enemy.

nursing is really good though.

I don't think it's easier, but it's a great choice for a career.

If I could stand the human body in anyway I would be a murse.

>Women took over the field of medicine

Do you even try?
kff.org/other/state-indicator/physicians-by-gender/?currentTimeframe=0&sortModel={"colId":"Location","sort":"asc"}

women can barely drive cars, you really want them controlling something that requires 3d control and not just 2d?

Just look at what happened at FOX News, $20 million settlement with more to come.

Companies will think twice before hiring women out of the risk of false or real sexual harassment claims and lawsuits.

Nursing involves learning about things you grow up dealing with most of the time. You end up learning a lot of the terminology in standard school from health courses.

Technology means learning a bunch of new terminology, applications, and making a habit of thinking about every little step and detail instead of just the general picture. It just in general requires more effort to learn at first.

nothing is stopping them.

most women simply don't like the field.

Yeah, Sup Forums is a prime example of that. Just look at >is that a woman? she only got in due to diversity politics!
>girls can't code, look at this one example where a woman did something stupid
>but I'm right!

usually, it's tech in women. see: large inserts

To be fair, github is run by feminists now and actually enacted a policy against white males in the name of diversity.

Because it wasn't. I'm talking back in the 50s. It was bitch work (arguably it still is)

Far more women are qualifying as doctors now than men, my mentally challenged friend

math.kth.se/matstat/gru/godis/sex.pdf

Here read a paper. It clearly shows the differences between females and males in what features and information in the environment they find salient.

Are there exceptions? Sure, there are women who behave more masculine and who are clearly into hardcore tech. Every woman ive known who was more into science was either very masculine, autistic, or both. You see, every woman ive know has been different from other women because in order to be able to do something different than the typical woman their brain and behavior had to be different than the typical woman. Consider that so many brilliant people (male or female) often can lack certain interpersonal skills or a sense of social mores that most people adhere to. Meaning its is the exceptionally rare person who can be well rounded, as the brain can only do specialized things. So for women they are more interested in people, not ideas or structures.

>Because it wasn't. I'm talking back in the 50s. It was bitch work (arguably it still is)

I don't care about the debate, but have you considered how massively autistic you sound?

I don't want it to be more technologically advanced. It's already advanced too fast.

Our laws and ethics regarding technology are moving much slower than the technology is, and it shows.

Where is the feminist outrage at female representation on the front line of war? Those number are so low they're rolling in the deep

citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.468.8157&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Further reading related to my points.

>organization/business embraces this social justice jerking and gender politics
>their software advancement suddenly stalls
>percentage of bugs and broken shit increases
>software starts regressing

I'm not the only one seeing this, right?

In some EU countries they want to introduce conscription for women.
They being the government. I don't know if they happen to also be feminists or not.

>hurr durr womyn in tech
No. Kode with Klossy was a good example why we don't need woman in IT IF they want it because MUH FEMINIZE
Everyone would appriciate a good coder, hell the first coder was a woman. But we don't want any "cd.. cd... cd .." in our industry.

Oh God this. The world doesn't need more "women", it needs more Grace Hopper's. And those are far less than half of the population.

Also she was a bit of a qttau (2qtpi) tbqh senpaialam

Well if your criteria for hiring someone is their gender/race/sexuality/some other superficial characteristic and not their aptitude, it's kind of obvious the quality of your employees will go down.

Keep in mind that in USA it's illegal to aptitude test as far as I know, so employers there hire based on education and women generally do better in school/college.
Whether that translates to any useful skills or not is another question.

The issue are people like you
>It's a women
>She must be one of these "womyn in tech" who can't actually code
>She probably only got in due to SJW diversity gender politics

Name just one example.

goto ;

I didn't say they are all SJWs. I said most of them are. Hell, my daughter is started to learn Assembly last week because she thought it's fun. Not because HURR DURR MORE WOMYNN.

There still isn't that many women in tech currently. Lets be honest, computer science, especially today, is increasingly becoming so complex and quality of education so inconsistent, that alot of companies are releasing mediocre work. To do the things people want these days, we need people who can reflect on and understand complexity and who can express it through clean coherent code and we need millions of people to do that. Thinking line by line can often be detrimental to the larger system.

Or just watch two minutes of this video (from 22:20):

youtube.com/watch?v=tiJVJ5QRRUE

Prof. Simon Baron-Cohen (cousin of Sacha a.k.a. Borat / Ali G) did research on kids and explains how testosterone affects the development of the brain (and the psychological implications of that)

>ostracized
when I was in college, there was no a single woman in the department. not a single one across 3 years of material and 500+ students.

if we'd started out with two dozens of them, only to lose them by being creepy pushy nerds or bigoted assholes, then maybe I'd agree.

but they didn't fucking show up. they're not even fucking trying to get into IT or CS. so tell me what the fuck I'm supposed to do about that exactly?

Mozilla, Ubisoft, Microdong.

qualifying is not the same as innovating

the most hilarious thing about red pill dregs is that they somehow believe they got 3 and a half billion people totally figured out.

Is that supposed to be an argument?

You should force women to go into IT and CS at gunpoint.

>Name just one example.
GitHub, Ubishit, EAshit, web browsers (which keep getting worse and worse monthly), some Linux Distros.

women with deeper voices tend to be more rational

This user is right, I met one woman in a programming class and she was lesbian and had a hormone disorder that masculinized her.

The question was about the non existant feminist outrage at the low numbers of females on the front lines of war. When can we expect feminist outrage on this?

Never. Why would they want to die in a war?

I thought you were talking about men and being sarcastic.

The hilarious thing is that women were always allowed art since before even Classical Greece, always given the tools and finance for art, and even the marketing for any art they could produce,
yet it is men in the end who dominate.
Even the pop music of today is bitches trying and failing to imitate Michael Jackson and etc.

Even when women are given complete right in something, completely allowed, they don't do shit.

Nobody's stopping them from joining a trade.

I'm not trying to imply there isn't a solution.

I'd wager something could be done at the high school level. career counselors probably don't even think once about directing girls towards the tech sector. maybe start there.

no amount of armchair psychology will work on me because I'm interested in rationalizing misogyny.

combat jobs in the US military have only been available to women since last year.

you have absolutely no fucking clue what classical era Greek society was actually like.

and IQ is the best measurement of job success, better than experience, personality, etc

>what is evolutionary psychology

To protect their country but that's besides the point. The point is feminazis are outraged about gender quotas so I'm asking where is their outrage in the lack of woman on the front lines of war to defend their country. You need to be consistent with your outrage.

Come now. If humans did not have even a basic way of understanding and predicting each others behavior, society would be chaotic. I suppose the one thing that always confuses me about the claim that all gender is an absolute construction and no behavior is truly gendered or predictable, it how for 10000 years humans have organized thousands of cultures in about the same way. Men doing the designing, building, and killing, while women did the nurturing, the socializing, and the care taking. There was no internet, books, or giant male organizations dictating patriarchy or how or what gender is, gender is an emergent phenomenon.

Its simply incredibly improbable that so many cultures and societies would express the same social more for men and women unless it was tied to some ancient biological inclinations. Sex differences are meaningful and need to be in order for any species to survive a dynamic environment.

Ah, yes
>Companies losing value is solely due to women!
It's just a matter of time until other inclusive companies such as Google, Apple and Intel will disappear into obscurity.

Of course nobody is stopping them. But prejudices will make sure that it will be neither a good work environment nor very profitable for them.

if they were interested in equality they would be egalitarians not feminists

>what is sociology
>what is developmental psychology
there's infinite hypotheses that could be made to explain this kind of situation. you chose one because it was in line with your established beliefs.

you're a kool-aid drinker. pure and simple. there is absolutely nothing that warrants you being so secure in your beliefs.

>you have absolutely no fucking clue what classical era Greek society was actually like.
So you argue by diverting from a topic and not having anything to say? Interesting.

>If you didn't ostracize half of the population from the IT field, we could be much more technologically advanced today.

Are you referring to the ostracizing of male "nerds" and "geeks" and "four eyes"?
I agree, if many males weren't ostracized and insulted for decades by the same people who are pulling gender shit now, the field wouldn't have become the laughing stock it is now.
Equality through insulting people. How nice.

>If you didn't ostracize half of the population from the IT field, we could be much more technologically advanced today.
>you
>we
no

are you presupposing no genetic influence between the sexes?

If you didn't suffer from a superiority complex which makes you think that men should treat you on the same level they treat their mothers, sisters, girlfriends, and closest of relations,
just because you have a vagina;
maybe you wouldn't get rightful flack in return.

>If humans did not have even a basic way of understanding and predicting each others behavior, society would be chaotic
society is both a formative agent and the mutable product of its collective members. it exerts so, so much more pressure on the individual than the other way around. your life is more the result of society than that of your genes. significantly more.

am I saying there are no observable (or possibly debilitating) differences between the two genders? not at all. but for some something as far removed from evolution as computer fucking science, to even bring it up is nothing short of retarded.

but of course, everything I've written so far is pure conjecture and not the result of prolonged study. much like your own drivel.

you're claiming that the opportunity was there. it was not. women in ancient Greece had shit for rights. in fact, we've only had relative equality in western society for half a century.

I'm suggesting that those differences don't necessary apply to this particular context, and that there's no compelling argument to suggest that they do. not in this thread, at least.

>I'm interested in rationalizing misogyny.

I assume that is meant to say *not* interested

In which case, what is the point in giving you all the evidence when you refuse to listen to it?

Watch two minutes of this video (from 22:20) to hear why men and women think differently. Then give me a response. I'll be waiting. youtube.com/watch?v=p5LRdW8xw70

To be good at anything tech you have to be a no life autist.

>OMG LOOK AT THESE AUTISTS SITTING IN THEIR FANCY OFFICES ALL DAY THEIR JOBS MUST BE SO EASY
>I WANT TO SIT IN A FANCY OFFICE TOO MUH SEXISM
>OMG WHY IS THIS SO HARD AND BORING

That's basically tech women in a nutshell.

The worst thing is that the liberal retards keep lying that tech is easy and keep pushing women into a field they won't survive in.
You are tired of shitty Pajeet code/engineering? Wait until you see women work.

>In which case, what is the point in giving you all the evidence when you refuse to listen to it?
you are confused. articles and videos are there to support your arguments, not make them for you.

there ought to a term for this kind of bullshit. argumentum ad copypaste? "please read/watch this and counter each point as if they were my own".

pure intellectual laziness. as expected of sheltered Sup Forumstards.

That same argument could be used on you.

>I'm suggesting that those differences don't necessary apply to this particular context, and that there's no compelling argument to suggest that they do. not in this thread, at least.
but there is already empirical evidence to the contrary which you acknowledge, therefore you have some cognitive dissonance as a result of your ambition to string your egalitarian narrative

The world ain't ever gonna be equal so long as i have to fill up the platters at home with food bitch. It's all families for themselves excluding select few proportional circumstances.
Nobody is ever going to waste their limited life energy accommodating your ovary mad interests when they have family and friends to spend that energy on.
And this is the sole reason this whole Westboro Feminist Church shit is now treated as comedy theatrics akin to Scientology.
Just like Scientology it has some public figures and money going for it and it survives, but the majority of society shits on it.

A whole lot of this.

Some women in the field have been awesome... But for the most part, total and utter shit. They should do something they are interested in. Most people don't give a fuck about math, and women are even less likely to give a fuck about math.

Feminists are egalitarians. The problem is that nobody other than communists and feminists seems to understand what the word equality or egalitarian means.

It's not equal rights or equal opportunity. It's equality of outcome. I always find it funny how people virtue signal with egalitarian. "I'm not a feminist, but I am an egalitarian - look at how virtuous I am" while at the same time slamming feminists for virtue signaling. It's the same thing dude, if you don't understand what the words mean you shouldn't be using them to virtue signal.

>you're claiming that the opportunity was there. it was not.
Prove it. Show historical documentation banning women from delving into music, painting, sculpting, etc.
I'm waiting.
Of course, i expect you will show nothing.

A little tip: Since the invention of the piano, the majority of the products ever produced went into female rooms and female hands.
Piano music, from classical to rag and other is still solely ruled by men.

You don't have a single argument.

>Most people don't give a fuck about math, and women are even less likely to give a fuck about math.
There are actually quite a lot of women in maths.

My question is what is really stopping women? Stopping them from doing what many boys do alone in their bedroom, that is going online and learning to code. There is plenty of information and resources online that any woman could just sit around in her room and be a a social outcast... oh... I answered my own question. Its the rare female who would willingly give up what is most salient to them, that is socialization, for what is one of the loneliest fields. In order to thrive in computer science you have to be able to shutout the world and just focus on a set of processes. Not many females are going to allow themselves to become a pariah so that they can become fluent in arcane data structures and languages. What women want is prestige, but not the work that is required to obtain that prestige. Otherwise we would have apps released by women that would get bought out or funded because they simply are that good.

For instance, my girlfriend is getting a PhD, she has multiple publications, is good with stats, and is quite prolific. Here is the thing, she has autism, she does not care about or understand what females are interested in, and is more than willing to isolate herself and work for hours. Shes successful because she does not behave like a typical woman, whereas all the women she has worked with mostly gossip and even resent that she can work so hard.

>Some women in the field have been awesome
Like who? Can't think of anyone. Anyone who was awesome in the field was male and a total autist.
Even the contemporary ones. Just look at Musk or Zuckerberg. Them speaking in public is non-stop cringe.

Prof. Simon Baron-Cohen did research on 1 day old babies (before cultural biases could influence their behaviour).

He presented them with a face and a mechanical object. He found that more boys spent longer looking at the mechanical object than the face. And more girls spend more time looking at the face.

He realised this was due to testosterone influencing the development of the brain. And boys are producing twice as much testosterone as girls in the womb. He found that the higher a baby's testosterone levels in the womb (whether they are boy or girl), the more time they will spend looking at the mechanical object.

Babies with higher testosterone levels displayed other characteristics while studied over time. They took longer to develop language, longer to develop social skills, and struggled with empathy. They also displayed a much greater interest in understanding systems (e.g. being fascinated with toy trains, mechanical things like that)

I wish you would be willing to hear it from the horse's mouth (in that video) but unfortunately you're too lazy to do so.

So what do you say to that, my friend?